Mead identifies the self as both an object and the subject. “This characteristic is represented in the word “self”, which is a reflexive, and indicates that which can be both subject and object.” (Appelroth, 333.) A person considers himself to be his desires, thoughts, aspirations. Then he also considers the self which others see. His interpretation of what others think of him, mold his self-concept. In his lectures, Mead felt that looking at oneself as an object, was necessary for assessing one’s status, in an attempt at betterment. Of course, self-assessment is only achievable when one measures oneself against those others who interact with him. These interactions, with one’s closest ‘others’ will help him to interpret and absorb societal norms. Mead felt that we use our “looking-glass self” as feedback to determine how we should think of ourselves. The following explanation of self and society will detail how Mead saw that self and society fit together.
Mead identifies the self as distinguishable from the body because in certain instances, such as moments when the "fight or flight" instinct commands control the body simply reacts and acts independently. Mead asks how we can locate our observation outside of ourselves in order to see the object which is our “self”. This is where the "Looking Glass Self" comes to aid. As one looks into the mirror he can see his image and compare it to those others surrounding him. He can judge whether to make changes to his image. These changes will be observed by others, and their interaction with him will adjust in accordance with his new image. Mead states that by interpreting the attitudes of others towards ourselves, we are then able to produce an objective idea of our self.
Communication, using symbols between ourselves, allows us to gain an objective perspective of our self. Communication is not simply an exchange of dialog, but rather a “conversation of gestures”. (336.) These gestures when interpreted similarly between the individuals of a group, the gestures become symbols. From this symbolic interactionism, we develop our “self” slowly over time. One could consider his “self” to be the sum of his interactions. Because we construct our "self" from interaction with society, our "self" cannot exist without social interaction.
We are constantly measuring others' reactions to us, in an attempt to gauge and create an appropriate response to the other who acted upon us. This is a societal interaction. While perpetually absorbing symbols, we can gather these symbols from many sources, including the incessant bombardment from the mass media. Symbols and messages flow in from many ports. One such message: "Think before you speak." is used quite regularly. It encourages those in society to first gauge within themself, the action or speech, and then convey the "edited" product upon those around him: his audience. Mead says that as our circle of interaction shifts between our social circles, our behavior toward others also changes. When we are at work, we are more stoic. When we are with friends, we are more playful. However, the most personal information about our self is reserved for those with whom we interact most often: our nuclear family. Perhaps certain secrets are never divulged to anyone besides our "self”, because our “self” is the only area where it would be acceptable to reveal these secrets.
The sum of the processes which constitute the self is the same as the processes which constitute society. The processes that society uses to take in and process interactions are the same processes that the self or the individual uses to process those interactions that are coming into the self from the society.
Although Mead notes that we do try to convey a very specific attitude in how we say our speech (such as a different tone or vernacular) he also notes that this sort of symbolism exists within our speech. Also, noting that the emotional response of the speaker is not similar to the response from the recipient of his words. Mead illustrates this point with a picture of a person who is angry, and is conveying his anger toward another person. The other person will not respond with anger, but instead with fear. We can see this in our current conversations. If a returning parent catches the babysitter in the liquor cabinet after putting the children to bed, the parent will express their anger. The natural reaction of the babysitter is fear. This exchange is essential to communication, and develops the self and the society.
Helen Keller was not content in life until she encountered her “self”. The only way she was able to construct a self was to begin communicating with others, by exchanging meaning with those around her. Once the child was able to assign meaning to objects and gestures, they became symbols. The symbols retained shared meaning between Helen and those others interacting with her, and at that moment she began communicating with others. The key that Mead is eager to convey is that these gestures share meaning between people. “What is essential to communication is that the symbol should arouse in one’s self what it arouses in the other individual.” (338.) Once Helen learned these shared meanings, she became part of the society and began developing her “self”.
It is essential to the success of the individual that he considers the collective attitude, in order to move toward a common goal with those who surround him. Not only does the individual consider the flux of attitudes between himself and other, he also accounts for the changing phases of the social activity at hand. As the phases of the game shift, the individual thus changes his actions to fit the new phase at hand. According to Mead, “…he thus enters into a special set of social relations with all the other individuals…” (341.) Regarding norms, people often identify with a certain “set” of norms which often are ascribed to one political organization. An individual can belong to several groups, and for each group abides by a different set of rules, or behaviors which are acceptable within the particular group.
To summarize Mead’s concepts of “self” and “society”, “A person is a personality because he belongs to a community, because he takes over the institutions of that community into his own conduct.” (342.) By representing the prescribed norms within his group, he makes us his own personality, and his personality, along with those of the group creates the personality of the group.
In Symbolic Interactionism, we are able to understand the prescribed rules within our group. Objects communicate to us, and when they are used for communication they become symbols. Anything can be a symbol, as long as the communication is understood by all. For example, a stop sign is readily understood by even the youngest members of society. However, there was a time when a stop sign was just metal and paint, and held no meaning. In order to convey the demand of “stopping” for those approaching the sign, society communicated to its members that one should halt, when one sees this sign at an intersection. This sign is so well recognized today, that it is even used to communicate in other areas other than the intersection, such as on tests’ pages. Our various groups use multitudes of symbols to communicate. As Mead acknowledges, so symbols are so well recognized that the individual does not always think before reacting to a certain symbol. Sometime these symbols can be confusing when improperly communicated...
This unconscious exchange of symbols has been long-studied, and the results have been cultivated into the “marketing” discipline. The objective of “marketing” is to increase sales within specific groups. By disseminating marketing materials such as posters, flyers, advertisements and commercials, professionals seek to sway the individual’s purchasing-actions. Mass-media can sway other decisions such as voting, dating, traveling, which movie one sees or which career one pursues.
Finally, our influence can shape our “self”. Americans are well-known to have an addiction to endless hours of TV consumption. Millions of direct and indirect messages are conveyed through this medium. TV can motivate us to better our lives, or to become stagnant in illusion. Instead of seeking our own story in real life, some people limit their action to the confines of a television story, or show. Movies can send uplifting messages or messages of destruction. Sometimes these messages are difficult to interpret, as not all will identically interpret all the messages throughout the production. Messages are constantly spewing out of video games, magazines, music videos, songs and books. However, these messages may not accurately represent the acceptable norms within an individual’s realm of society. He may interpret new messages from mass media incorrectly, and subsequently reiterate these newly learned messages within his social circle. When his message is ill-received, those who surround him have a duty to indicate whether his new actions are acceptable or deplorable. They have this duty, because in order to protect the attitude of their social circle, they must remain observant of the actions around them, and edit their own actions in response.
References:
-Classical and Contemporary Social Theory, by Scott Appelrouth and Laura Desfor Edles, Pine Forge Publishers. (2008)
